Why have theatrical styles of acting died out? Why is everything, even slow paced, now an exercise in cutting after every line spoken?
Acting skills aren't even relevant any more. Why should they be? Everything is shot for such a short amount of time that you could have a monkey for an actor and could still get something decent by just retaking a thousand times.
I want a return to the old ways. Where a scene could be shot and actors perform for minutes at a time without breaks. When they actually had to act. What do you think?
The ADHD editing is often making it seem like the filmmakers don't have faith in their movie, so they change the shot every 2 seconds so audience's brains get novelty, like cats having strings dangled in front of them. On the other hand the audiences are conditioned by watching modern movies, so going back to longer shots might be hard even if the film makers want to. Movies from 50s or 70s will be seen as boring to the modern audience.
The worst offender for me isn't dialogue, but action scenes with ultra short shots. They just make me dizzy.
Tips fedora
hey retards, theatrical acting is too unrealistic, too charicature-like and belongs in the theatre. it was used in movies early on but was substituted by realistic acting. also, editing became a thing, that's why you no longer get these long shots as much, because the director is trying to engage you and frame the scene in a cool way, not just literally have people talk for 5 minutes without anything else. actors still generally have to perform in 1 take, but sometimes when they fuck it up they can just roll on the same take and go from where they left off. also, directors now require a lot more takes to ensure a shot is perfect, every nuance is in place.
>>63598547
This. Look at this emotional scene, it lasts less than 10 seconds but carries many emotions.
>>63598280
Totally agree OP but its like fighting against CGI. Excited for THE because they shot it old fashioned supposedly
>>63598426
I agree in main, but not about action. Action scenes are the only time I can understand quick cuts, if they're designed to make things seem frantic and disorienting.
Dialogue has no place being hacked to pieces though. It makes things feel weird and unnatural, as if it's not a conversation but two people saying words when they're being filmed.
>>63598547
>theatrical acting is too unrealistic
Hot damn I can't handle these pleb opinions
>>63598638
>THE
What?
>>63598600
>still sarcastically posting about that scene
lots of death experts on /tv/...
It's a combination of 2 major factors. One, audiences literally couldn't give a fuck, they wouldn't know good acting if it bit them on the ass.
The second, is the introduction of digital film and editing tools. As a director, I can spend 10 minutes on making a few dozen takes of the same exact shot, on multiple cameras simultaneously, and then I can digitally composite the performance using cuts and audio splices to get the best possible performance despite the actual actor being second rate. If you've ever seen someone start talking, and then a cut to a characters reaction in a film, 9 times out of 10 that's hiding a composite of multiple audio performances and the best looking reaction shot from the bunch. Nothing you see on screen anymore is even close to real, and people pick up on it when the subtle facial cues are off by a a few hundred milliseconds because they used a slightly shorter soundbite with a longer reaction cut.
>Muh old fashioned shit
get over it, things have modernized
>>63598646
I think quick cuts are worse for action than for conversation scenes. From experience, I don't think that cutting every couple of seconds does anything to convey what it's like to be in a street fight or a car crash--quite the opposite. Also
>implying that liking naturalism is a pleb opinion
>>63600837
It really is a pleb opinion. If you can't see that it's because you're a pleb.
>>63600898
sick argument breh
>>63598280
>Why have theatrical styles of acting died out?
t. dumb nigger who doesn't want cinema to stand on its own as an artistic medium
>>63598280
Excellent question/topic OP.
>>63602665
Is this sarcasm?
